Polymeric materials suitable for ophthalmic devices and methods of manufacture
Biocompatible polymers useful in ophthalmic devices such as accommodating intraocular lenses. The polymers have improved resistance to the diffusion of fluid, relatively high refractive indexes, and mechanical properties to allow for deformation upon the application of force.
Latest PowerVision, Inc. Patents:
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/902,593, filed on Feb. 21, 2007, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTIONCataracts are a major cause of blindness in the world and the most prevalent ocular disease. Visual disability from cataracts accounts for more than 8 million physician office visits per year. When the disability from cataracts affects or alters an individual's activities of daily living, surgical lens removal with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is the preferred method of treating the related visual limitations. In the United States, about 2.5 million cataract surgical procedures are performed annually, making it the most common surgery for Americans over the age of 65. With about 97 percent of cataract surgery patients receiving intraocular lens implants each year, the annual costs for cataract surgery and associated care in the United States is larger than $4 billion.
A cataract is defined as an opacity of a patient's lens, whether it is a localized opacity or a diffuse general loss of transparency. To be clinically significant, however, the cataract must cause a significant reduction in visual acuity or a functional impairment. A cataract occurs as a result of aging or secondary to hereditary factors, trauma, inflammation, metabolic or nutritional disorders, or radiation. Age related cataract conditions are the most common.
In treating a cataract, the surgeon removes the crystalline lens matrix from the lens capsule and replaces it with an intraocular lens (“IOL”) implant. The typical IOL provides a selected focal length that allows the patient to have fairly good distance vision. After cataract surgery, however, the patient typically needs glasses for reading. This is explained by the imaging properties of the human eye, which are facilitated by several optical interfaces.
A healthy youthful human eye has a total power of approximately 59 diopters, with the anterior surface of the cornea (e.g. the exterior surface, including the tear layer) providing about 48 diopters of power, while the posterior surface provides about −4 diopters. The crystalline lens, which is situated posterior of the pupil in a transparent elastic capsule supported by the ciliary muscles, provides about 15 diopters of power, and also performs the critical function of focusing images upon the retina. This focusing ability, referred to as “accommodation,” enables imaging of objects at various distances.
The power of the lens in a youthful eye can be adjusted from 15 diopters to about 29 diopters by adjusting the shape of the lens from a moderately convex shape to a highly convex shape. The mechanism generally accepted to cause this adjustment is that ciliary muscles supporting the capsule (and the lens contained therein) move between a relaxed state (corresponding to the moderately convex shape) and a contracted state (corresponding to the highly convex shape). Because the lens itself is composed of viscous, gelatinous transparent fibers, arranged in an “onion-like” layered structure, forces applied to the capsule by the ciliary muscles cause the lens to change shape.
Isolated from the eye, the relaxed capsule and lens take on a spherical shape. Within the eye, however, the capsule is connected around its circumference by approximately 70 tiny ligament fibers to the ciliary muscles, which in turn are attached to an inner surface of the eyeball. The ciliary muscles that support the lens and capsule therefore are believed to act in a sphincter-muscular mode. Accordingly, when the ciliary muscles are relaxed, the capsule and lens are pulled about the circumference to a larger diameter, thereby flattening the lens, whereas when the ciliary muscles are contracted the lens and capsule relax somewhat and assume a smaller diameter that approaches a more spherical shape.
As noted above, the youthful eye has approximately 14 diopters of accommodation. As a person ages, the lens hardens and becomes less elastic, so that by about age 45-50, accommodation is reduced to about 2 diopters. At a later age the lens may be considered to be non-accommodating, a condition known as “presbyopia”. Because the imaging distance is fixed, presbyopia typically entails the need for bi-focals to facilitate near and far vision.
Apart from the age-related loss of accommodation ability, such loss also has affected IOLs for the treatment of cataracts. Although the research directed at accommodating IOLs has met with some success, the relative complexity of the methods and apparatus developed to date have prevented widespread commercialization of such devices.
IOLs were made from rigid polymeric materials such as polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), however more resilient polymeric materials are becoming increasingly more popular.
An IOL typically comprises an optic portion providing for the transmission of light, and a haptic portion extending peripherally from the optic portion.
In some IOL designs, such as those described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,932,966 to Christie et al., the optic portion of the lens comprises a thin membrane sealed along its edges to a thicker substrate to form a cavity between the two. Deformable haptics are attached to the periphery of the optic portion and are filled with a driving fluid, such a silicone oil. Movement of the ciliary muscles deforms the haptics and drives fluid from the haptics into the cavity to deflect the thin membrane of the optic portion, thereby modifying the optical power of the lens. As described in that patent, the substrate of the lens may comprise polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), while the thin membrane and haptics may comprise a silicone elastomer.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,730,123 to Klopotek also describes a fluid-driven IOL, in which an optical fluid is transferred between an optical chamber having a flexible deformable surface and a reservoir to change the optical power of the lens. In the IOL described in that patent, the substrate, deformable surface and internal components are all formed from an acrylic elastomer.
These and other designs suffer from a number of drawbacks. For example, it is known that silicones have high permeability in silicone elastomer materials. Thus, over time, the silicones used in the above-described systems will have a tendency to diffuse through the silicone elastomers. Such diffusion results in a loss of fluid from the IOL and also effects the mechanical properties of the silicone elastomer component, thereby degrading performance of the IOL over time. In addition, silicone elastomer components are likely to permit aqueous fluids from the eye to diffuse into the IOL, further degrading performance of the IOL.
One previously known method to control diffusion of fluids into solid materials involves the deposition of a diffusion barrier on a surface of the lens. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,827,966 to Qiu et al. discloses diffusion-controllable coatings on ophthalmic lenses capable of controlling the out-diffusion or release of guest materials from the lenses. The coatings appear better suited for non-implantable lenses than for intraocular lenses, and are applied over the existing lens surfaces rather than being included in the polymeric composition of the lens.
A different process for permanently altering the surface properties of a lens surface, including an IOL, is the Langmuir-Blodgett deposition, described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,941,997, 4,973,429, and 5,068,318. Other known processes include controlled spin casting, chemisorptions, and vapor deposition.
A more recent technique developed for coating substrates is a layer-by-layer (“LbL”) polymer absorption process. In particular, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,518,767 and 5,536,573 to Rubner et al. describe methods of producing bilayers of p-type doped electrically conductive polycationic polymers and polyanions or water-soluble, non-ionic polymers on glass substrates.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,208,111 to Decher et al. describes a method for applying one or more layers to a support modified by the applications of ions and ionizable compounds of the same charges over the entire area. The one or more layers are made of organic materials, which in each layer contain ions of the same charge, the ions of the first layer having the opposite charge of the modified support and, in the case of several layers, each further layer having again the opposite charge of the previous layer.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,700,559 to Sheu et al. discloses a method for making a hydrophilic article having a substrate, an ionic polymeric layer bonded directly onto the substrate, and a disordered polyelectrolyte coating ionically bonded to the ionic polymeric layer. The ionic polymeric layer is obtained by a plasma treatment, an electron beam treatment, a corona discharge, an X-ray treatment, or an acid/base chemical modification of the substrate.
Although each of the above described surface modification techniques are effective for producing an IOL with an altered surface that is different from the remainder of the device, each of these processes requires complex and time-consuming pretreatments of the substrate surface to obtain a highly charged surface.
In addition, the above-described surface modifications involve applying coatings to the outer surfaces of the IOL, rather than providing an IOL with bulk properties that reduces diffusion of fluids into or out of the lens.
In view of the foregoing, it would be desirable to provide an ophthalmic device, such as an IOL, in which the bulk polymeric material provides enhanced resistance to diffusion of fluids into or out of the device.
In addition, it would be desirable that the polymer have properties that would allow it to be deformed to a delivery configuration to enable its implantation in the eye, yet return to a pre-implantation configuration after being implanted in the eye. In addition, it would be desirable that the polymeric composition have a sufficient high refractive index.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTIONOne aspect of the invention is a polymeric material for an ophthalmic device including butyl acrylate, trifluoroethyl methacrylate, and phenylethyl acrylate. In some embodiments the butylacrylate is present in the amount from about 35% to about 65% by volume, and in some embodiments it is present in the amount from about 45% to about 55% by volume.
In some embodiments the trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the amount from about 15% to about 30% by volume, and in some embodiments the trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the amount from about 18% to about 22% by volume.
In some embodiments the phenylethyl acrylate is present in the amount from about 20% to about 40% by volume, and in some embodiments the phenylethyl acrylate is present in the amount from about 26% to about 34% by volume.
In some embodiments the material also includes a cross-linking agent such as ethylene glycol dimethylacrylate. The material can also include an ultraviolet light absorbing material. The polymer as formed can also have a barrier coating on any surface to further enhance the polymer's resistance to the diffusion of fluid, such as, for example, silicone oil, water, or saline.
The polymeric material can be used for an intraocular lens which comprises a central optic portion and a peripheral non-optic portion. In some embodiments the central optic portion is made at least in part of the polymeric material, whereas the non-optic portion is comprised of a second polymeric material different than the polymeric material in the central optic portion. In some embodiments the central optic portion and peripheral non-optic portion are made from substantially the same polymeric material.
One aspect of the invention is a polymeric material for an ophthalmic device. The polymer includes an alkyl acrylate present in the amount from about 35% to about 65% by volume, a fluoroacrylate present in the amount from about 15% to about 30%, and a phenyl acrylate present in the amount from about 20% to about 40%. The alkyl acrylate can be butyl acrylate; the fluoroacrylate can be trifluoroethyl methacrylate; and the phenyl acrylate can be phenylethyl acrylate.
One aspect of the invention is a polymeric material for an ophthalmic device wherein the material includes an alkyl acrylate, a fluoroacrylate, and a phenyl acrylate, wherein there is an effective amount of the fluoroacrylate to provide the polymer material with a substantial resistance to the diffusion of fluid. In some embodiments the fluid is silicone oil, saline, or water. In some embodiments the substantial resistance to the diffusion of fluids comprises having a swell fraction in silicone oil that is less than about 0.02, and in some embodiments is substantially zero.
In some embodiments there is an effective amount of the alkyl acrylate to provide the polymer material with a modulus of elasticity between about 0.1 Mpa and about 0.6 Mpa. In some embodiments there is an effective amount of the phenyl acrylate to provide the polymeric composition with a refractive index between about 1.44 and about 1.52.
One aspect of the invention is a polymeric material for an ophthalmic device wherein the polymeric material has a refractive index between about 1.44 and about 1.52, a modulus of elasticity between about 0.1 Mpa and about 0.6 Mpa, and wherein the polymeric material is substantially resistant to the diffusion of fluid, such as silicone oil, water, or saline. In some embodiments the polymer is substantially resistant to the diffusion of fluid without a barrier coating layer on a surface of the polymer.
One aspect of the invention is an accommodating fluid-driven intraocular lens. The IOL includes a light-transmissive optic portion and a haptic portion extending peripherally from the optic portion. The optic portion and the haptic portion are in fluidic communication, and the haptic portion is configured so that movement of a patient's ciliary muscle causes a fluid to be displaced between the optic portion and the haptic portion. At least one of the optic portion and haptic portion comprises a polymer material comprising butyl acrylate, trifluoroethyl methacrylate, and phenylethyl acrylate. The polymeric material preferably prevents the fluid disposed within the IOL from diffusing through the polymer. In some embodiments the fluid is silicone oil.
One aspect of the invention is a method of manufacturing a polymeric material for an ophthalmic device. The method includes providing a mixed composition by adding together and mixing butyl acrylate in the amount of about 35% to about 65%, trifluoroethyl methacrylate in the amount of about 15% to about 30%, and phenylethyl acrylate in the amount of about 20% to about 40%, and then curing the mixed composition.
The above and other objects and advantages of the present invention will be apparent upon consideration of the following detailed description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like reference numerals refer to like parts throughout, and in which:
The present invention relates generally to improved polymeric materials. The polymeric materials have improved resistance to the diffusion of fluid, relatively high refractive indexes, and are adapted to assume an initial configuration after being deformed during implantation in the human body. While the polymeric materials can be used in a wide variety of applications, the polymers are described herein in their use in an ophthalmic device such as an intraocular lens (“IOL”). While one use of the polymers is for a fluid-driven, accommodating IOL, the polymers can be used in a non-accommodating or non-fluid driven IOL. In addition to an IOL, the polymeric compositions of the present invention can also be used in other ophthalmic devices such as, but not limited to, contact lenses, keratoprostheses, capsular bag extension rings, corneal inlays, corneal rings, or other ophthalmic devices. An exemplary alternative use would be in the field of breast implants, such that the polymers can be used as an exterior shell-like material to prevent leakage of an internal material.
The polymeric compositions described herein may be used in an IOL, such as any of the fluid-driven IOLs described in U.S. Patent Application No. 60/433,046, filed Dec. 12, 2002, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/734,514, filed Dec. 12, 2003, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/971,598, filed Oct. 22, 2004, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/173,961, filed Jul. 1, 2005, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/252,916, filed Oct. 17, 2005, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/642,388, filed Dec. 19, 2006, and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/646,913, filed Dec. 27, 2006, the disclosures of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety. The compositions may also, however, be used in a non fluid-driven IOL or a non-accommodating IOL.
A device implanted in the eye becomes exposed to the fluid in the eye. The fluid in the eye can, over time, diffuse through the device and have unintended and/or undesired effects on the physical characteristics of the device. For example, a polymeric IOL that is implanted in the eye may suffer from the diffusion of eye fluid into the IOL's polymeric material. Attempts have been made to coat ophthalmic devices with barrier layers to prevent such diffusion, but these procedures can be costly and time consuming. In addition, if an ophthalmic device contains a chamber or channel within the device which contains a fluid, there is a risk that that fluid can diffuse out of its fluid chamber and into the polymeric material. This results in a decrease in the amount of fluid that can be utilized by the IOL, as well as to possibly alter the physical characteristics of the polymeric material. Therefore, the inventive bulk polymers described herein can be used in ophthalmic devices to resist the diffusion of fluid into or out of the device.
For implantable devices that must be implanted through an incision in the sclera, it is generally desirable that the incision in the sclera be as small as possible while still being able to deform the device without damaging it. The device must also be able to reform to its initial configuration after delivery. The inventive polymers described herein can therefore be used in ophthalmic device that need to be deformed to be delivered through an incision, yet will return to their initial configuration once implanted in the eye.
Similarly, it may be desirable to increase the refractive index (“RI”) of the ophthalmic device to increase its refractory power. An increase in the RI of the bulk polymer can allow the device to be thinner, yet maintain a desired power. This can also provide the device with a smaller delivery profile to reduce the size of the incision in the eye during implantation.
Improved properties of the polymers described herein include, without limitation, the modulus of elasticity, the index of refraction, the resistance to the diffusion of fluids, the responsiveness of the composition, mechanical strength, rigidity, wettability, and optical clarity. These properties are not necessarily mutually exclusive and the list is not intended to be exhaustive.
One embodiment of the invention is a polymeric material for an ophthalmic device. The polymer comprises a first component, a second component, and a third or more components. In a preferred embodiment, the composition comprises butyl acrylate, trifluoroethyl methacrylate, phenylethyl acrylate, and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate as a cross-linker. These monomers are not intended to be limiting and are provided by way of example.
To achieve the desired properties of the polymer described above, it is contemplated that particular monomers or other components may be selected to achieve specific properties, or that particular monomers and other components may be selected in combination to achieve specific properties.
Butyl acrylate, for example, a rubbery material, generally enhances the responsiveness of the polymeric material. Alternatives for butyl acrylate include alkyl acrylates and other monomers with suitable responsiveness properties. Alternatives for butyl acrylate which may demonstrate responsive properties include, without limitation, octyl acrylate, dodecyl methacrylate, n-hexyl acrylate, n-octyl methacrylate, n-butyl methacrylate, n-hexyl methacrylate, n-octyl methacrylate, 2-ethylhexyl acrylate, 2-ethylhexyl methacrylate, 2,2-dimethylpropyl acrylate, 2,2-dimethylpropyl methacrylate, trimethylcyclohexyl acrylate, trimethylcyclohexyl methacrylate, isobutyl acrylate, isobutyl methacrylate, isopentyl acrylate, isopentyl methacrylate, and mixtures thereof. In addition, alternatives for butyl acrylate may include a branched chain alkyl ester, e.g. 2-ethylhexyl acrylate, 2-ethylhexyl methacrylate, 2,2-dimethylpropyl acrylate, 2,2-dimethylpropyl methacrylate, trimethylcyclohexyl acrylate, trimethylcyclohexyl methacrylate, isobutyl acrylate, isobutyl methacrylate, isopentyl acrylate, isopentyl methacrylate and mixtures thereof.
In some embodiments butyle acrylate is present in the range from about 10% to about 80% by volume, and in some embodiments is present in the range from about 20% to about 70% by volume. In preferred embodiments butyl acrylate is present in the range from about 35% to about 65% by volume, and in more preferred embodiments from about 45% to about 65% by volume. All percentages recited herein are considered to be “by volume,” unless specifically stated otherwise.
In some embodiments the polymer has a modulus of elasticity ranging from about 0.1 to about 0.6 Mpa. In some embodiments the modulus is between about 0.1 to about 0.3 Mpa.
Trifluoroethyl methacrylate, or suitable alternatives, can be added to the polymeric material to enhance the polymer's resistance to the diffusion of fluids as described herein. Generally, using a monomer with more fluorine atoms will enhance the polymer's resistance to the diffusion of fluid.
While the ethyl group of trifluoroethyl can potentially bind up to 5 fluorine atoms, a large number of fluorine atoms can reduce the refractive index of the polymer. In some embodiments, therefore, trifluoroethyl methacrylate will provide a desired balance between the polymer's resistance to diffusion and the polymer's refractive index.
Fluorocarbon monomers can enhance the polymer's resistance to the diffusion of fluid and some can be used as substitutes for trifluoroethyl methacrylate. Alternatives for trifluoroethyl methacrylate include fluoroacrylates and other monomers with that provide that polymer with suitable resistance to diffusion properties. Alternatives for trifluoroethyl methacrylate include, without limitation, heptadecafluorodecyl acrylate, heptadecafluorodecyl methacrylate, hexafluorobutyl acrylate, hexafluorobutyl methacrylate, tetrafluoropropyl methacrylate, octafluoropentyl acrylate, octafluoropentyl methacrylate, dodecafluoropheptyl methacrylate, heptafluorobutyl acrylate, trifluoroethyl acrylate, hexafluoro-iso-propyl methacrylate, pentafluorophenyl acrylate, and pentafluorophenyl methacrylate.
In some embodiments trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the range from about 5% to about 70%, and in some embodiments it is present in the range from about 10% to about 50%. In preferred embodiments it is present in the range of about 15% to about 30%, and in more preferred embodiments it is present in the range of about 18% to about 22%.
Phenylethyl acrylate, or suitable alternatives, can be included in the polymeric composition to increase the refractive index of the polymer. Phenyl groups in general can increase the refractive index of the polymer. Alternatives for Phenylethyl acrylate include phenyl acrylates and other monomers with that provide that polymer with suitably high refractive index.
Other groups which can be used to increase the refractive index of the polymer include, without limitation, benzyl (benzoyl), carbazole-9-yl, tribromophenyl, chlorophenyl, and pentabromophenyl. Exemplary monomers that can be used as alternatives to phenylethyl acrylate include, without limitation, tribromophenyl acrylate, 2-(9H-Carazole-9-yl)ethyl methacrylate, 3-chlorostyrene, 4-chlorophenyl acrylate, benzyl acrylate, benzyl methacrylate, benzyl methacrylamide, n-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone, n-vinylcarbazole, pentabromophenyl acrylate, and pentabromophenyl methacrylate, phenylethyl methacrylate, 2-phenylpropyl acrylate, or 2-phenylpropyl methacrylate.
In some embodiments phenylethyl acrylate is present in the range from about 5% to about 60%, while in some embodiments it is present in the range of about 10% to about 50%. In preferred embodiments it is present in the range of about 20% to about 40%, and in more preferred embodiments it is present in the range of about 26% to about 34%.
In some embodiments the polymer has a refractive index of between about 1.44 to about 1.52. In some embodiments the refractive index is between about 1.47 and about 1.52. In some embodiments the refractive index is between about 1.47 and about 1.5.
In some embodiments the composition also includes a cross-linking agent, such as ethylene glycol dimethacrylate. Examples of suitable crosslinking agents include but are not limited to diacrylates and dimethacrylates of triethylene glycol, butylene glycol, neopentyl glycol, ethylene glycol, hexane-1,6-diol and thio-diethylene glycol, trimethylolpropane triacrylate, N,N′-dihydroxyethylene bisacrylamide, diallyl phthalate, triallyl cyanurate, divinylbenzene; ethylene glycol divinyl ether, N,N′-methylene-bis-(meth)acrylamide, sulfonated divinylbenzene, divinylsulfone, ethylene glycol diacrylate, 1,3-butanediol dimethacrylate, 1,6 hexanediol diacrylate, tetraethylene glycol dimethacrylate, trifunctional acrylates, trifunctional methacrylates, tetrafunctional acrylates, tetrafunctional methacrylates and mixtures thereof.
Cross-linking agents may be present in amounts less than about 10%, less than about 5%, less than about 2%, or less than about 1%. The cross-linking agent(s) can cause the polymers to become interlaced within a tri-dimensional space, providing for a compact molecular structure having an improved elastic memory, or responsiveness, over the non-crosslinked composition.
In some embodiments of the invention the polymeric compositions also includes one or more ultraviolet (UV) light absorbing materials, such as an acrylate or methacrylate functionalized benzotriazole or benzophenone, in amounts less about 5%. In some embodiments the UV light absorbing material(s) is present in the range from about 0.05% to about 2%. Suitable ultraviolet light absorbers for use in the present invention include, without limitation, β-(4-benzotriazoyl-3-hydroxyphenoxy)ethyl acrylate, 4-(2-acryloyloxyethoxy)-2-hydroxybenzophenone, 4-methacryloyloxy-2-hydroxybenzophenone, 2-(2′-methacryloyloxy-5′-methylphenyl)benzotriazole, 2-(2′-hydroxy-5′-methacryloyloxyethylphenyl)-2H-benzotriazole, 2-[3′-tert-butyl-2′-hydroxy-5′-(3″-methacryloyloxypropyl)phenyl]-5-chloro-benzotriazole, 2-[3′-tert-butyl-5′-(3″-dimethylvinylsilylpropoxy)-2′-hydroxyphenyl]-5-m-ethoxybenzotriazole, 2-(3′-allyl-2′-hydroxy-5′-methylphenyl)benzotriazole, 2-[3′-tert-butyl-2′-hydroxy-5-(3″-methacryloyloxypropoxy)phenyl]-5-chloro-benzotriazole and 2-[3′-tert-butyl-2′-hydroxy-5′-(3″-methacyloyloxypropoxy)phenyl]-5-chloro-benzotriazole. One skilled in the art will appreciate that different other chemistries of UV light absorbants may be selected.
One or more suitable free radical thermal polymerization initiators may be added to the polymeric compositions described herein. Examples of such initiators include but are not limited to organic peroxides, such as acetyl peroxide, lauroyl peroxide, decanoyl peroxide, stearoyl peroxide, benzoyl peroxide tert-butyl peroxypivalate, peroxydicarbonate, and the like. Such an initiator can be added in the range of about 0.01% to about 1% of the total polymer mixture.
Alternative UV initiators include those known in the field such as, for example but not limited to, benzoin methyl ether, benzoin ethyl ether, Darocur® 1173, 1164, 2273, 1116, 2959, 3331 (EM Industries) and Irgacur® 651 and 184 (Ciba-Geigy, Basel, Switzerland).
The diffusion resistant properties of the inventive polymers described herein may be further enhanced by providing a barrier layer on the exterior surface of the ophthalmic device. In addition, if the device comprises a fluid chamber disposed within the device (such as a fluid chamber disposed in a fluid-driven accommodating IOL), the device can also have a barrier layer on the inner surface of the fluid chamber to increase the resistance to diffusing out of the fluid chamber. The barrier layer can be a thin layer of a fluorocarbon materials or polymers, examples of which include hexafluoroethane, hexafluoropropylene, hexafluoropropane, octofluoropropane, polytetrafluoroethylene, and 1H, 1H, 2H-perfluoro-1-dodecene. The barrier layer can be deposited or covalently bonded on the solid surfaces of the ophthalmic device, either individually or in combination through a variety of manufacturing processes. One common manufacturing process is plasma deposition.
The layers formed by plasma deposition will generally be very thin, for example, from about 20 to about 100 nanometers. Because fluorocarbon polymers generally have low refraction indices, a barrier layer with a thickness that is less than a quarter of the wavelength of visible light will not be seen with the naked eye.
As stated above, the inventive polymers described herein may be used in an IOL with fluid disposed therein, such as in fluid chambers. In general, the viscosity of a fluid is related to the diffusion properties of the fluid; a low viscosity fluid can more easily diffuse through the polymer.
An ophthalmic device may contain silicone oil. The amount of silicone oil that diffuses through the polymer can be reduced by selecting a silicone oil with narrow molecular weight distribution, in particular with the removal of low molecular weight silicone oil molecules. A sequence of stripping processes is commonly used to remove low molecular weight components in silicone oil. In general, low molecular weight components will diffuse faster than higher molecular components. However, higher molecular weight components contribute to an increase in the viscosity which requires a greater force to drive the fluid throughout the IOL. Therefore, silicone oil with a narrow molecular weight distribution is preferred. The fluid disposed within the ophthalmic device is not limited to silicone oil and can be, for example, a saline solution.
In some embodiments, however, the IOL components are substantially index matched, such that the deflection of one of the surfaces of the IOL contributes significantly to any change in power during accommodation. For example, the bulk polymer will be substantially indexed matched to any fluid within the IOL. Substantially index-matched, as that phrase is used herein, include minimal differences in refractive indexes between components of the IOL. For example, if adhesives are used in the manufacturing of an IOL, those adhesives may have different refractive indexes but those differences will be negligible when considering the overall power changes of the accommodating IOL.
In some embodiments the TG of the polymer is about −20° C., and can stretch to about 4× the length without breaking.
The optics portion and the haptic portion(s) may be comprised of the same polymeric composition or may be comprised of different compositions. The composition of the optics and haptic(s) portions may depend on which properties are desired in each of the components. For example, it may not be necessary to achieve a high refractive index in the haptics portion as the haptics do not generally contribute to the focusing of light, and thus a polymer used for the haptics may not need a high refractive index. Similarly, for example, it may be desirable for the haptics portion to possess different responsiveness properties than the static optics portion.
A number of experiments were carried out to achieve compositions with desired properties. In a first experiment, butyl acrylate (BuA) was tested as an alternative to PMMA for use in the non-fluidic portions of the IOL (i.e., the bulk polymer). BuA is more flexible than PMMA and, like all acrylic polymers, also has a high level of atacticity which provides for low crystallinity, adequate processing characteristics, high optical quality, and long term stability to ultraviolet (UV) light. Tests indicated that solid lens components manufactured from BuA exhibited improved responsiveness to movements of the ciliary muscles in comparison to the same components manufactured from PMMA, but at the same time no marked increase could be observed over the PMMA components in terms of resistance to diffusion of IOL and eye fluids.
In a second experiment, solid lens components were produced comprising a copolymer of BuA and trifluoroethyl methacrylate (TFEMA). This composition was compared with components manufactured from BuA alone. Adding TFEMA in from about 20% to about 30% caused the lens components to retain the same desirable responsiveness to movements of the ciliary muscles as the unmodified BuA components, and also resulted in a marked improvement in diffusion resistance to IOL fluids and eye fluids (which can be observed by, for example, measuring the swell fraction described below). However, this composition exhibited a decrease in the refractive index. Such BuA-TFEMA compositions as described above may be suitable for use in IOL components that do not require optical clarity, for example, in the haptic portion of an IOL. Such compositions also have utility in non-ophthalmologic applications, such as for use in breast implants, where a responsive material highly resistant to fluid diffusion is desirable.
In a third experiment, phenylethyl acrylate (PhEA) was copolymerized together with the BuA-TFEMa composition from above. A sharp increase in the refractive index of this composition was observed, particularly when BuA was present from about 30% to about 60%, when PhEA was present from about 20% to about 40%, and when TFEMA was present from about 20% to about 50%. More specifically, an increase of the refractive index to 1.477 was obtained, with an elastic modulus measured in the 0.1-0.3 Mpa range. Importantly, IOL solid components manufactured from this composition proved to have an excellent resistance to diffusion and a high responsiveness to movements of the ciliary muscles.
In a fourth experiment, a cross-linking agent was added to the BuA-PhEA-TFEMA composition as an additional constituent. In particular, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate was found to operate as a suitable cross-linking agent with this composition. The foregoing cross-linking agents may be added in amounts of less than about 5% of the BuA-TFEMA-PhEA composition and cause the composition polymers to become interlaced within a tri-dimensional space, providing for a compact molecular structure having an improved elastic memory over the non-crosslinked composition. The resulting compositions also showed improved diffusion resistance.
When IOL solid components were manufactured from BuA-TFEMA-PhEA-EGDMA compositions, and included an optional barrier layer, improvements in diffusion resistance of the IOL were observed that were up to 40 times greater than the material without the barrier coating. Additionally, these solid components were biocompatible, optically clear, had a high refractive index and desirable levels of mechanical strength. These components also exhibited a level of flexibility and elastic memory sufficient to permit the IOL to be inserted without breaking through a small incision in the cornea, and later capable of regaining its original shape within an acceptable amount of time.
To test a polymer's resistance to diffusion, a swell study can be performed which detects how much a polymeric sample with known dimensions and weight swells when in contact with a fluid. The test measures solubility but not necessarily diffusivity and can be accomplished as follows:
Prepare a sample polymer of known dimensions and weight (e.g., 1 cm×2 cm); add fluid (e.g. silicone oil); heat to a desired temperature (e.g., 35-37 C); at various time points, measure the sample's dimensions and weight and compare these to the original dimensions and weight. This tests how much the sample's dimensions and weight increased, or rather, how much the polymer “swelled”.
A diffusion study can also be performed which measures diffusivity rather than solubility, both of which are preferably small in the compositions described herein. The test can be performed as follows:
Prepare a thin film of the sample polymer (about 100 microns thick and 25 mm in diameter); mount the film between two reservoirs of fluid—one reservoir is the driving fluid such as silicone oil, and the other fluid is a saline solution; next, sample the saline reservoir over time to determine the content of the silicone oil that has diffused through the thin film polymer to measure diffusion of the silicone oil.
The following non-limiting examples illustrate certain aspects of the present invention.
EXAMPLE 1The following formulation is added together and mixed well:
Pour the formulation into a two-part mold cavity made of polypropylene, polymethylpentene, or glass. Seal the mold with no air entrapment.
Polymer curing is carried out by placing the sealed mold inside a chamber equipped with UV lamps such as Sankyo Denki Black Light Blue Lamp. Polymerization can be carried out in one hour or less depending on the lamp intensity. Optional postcuring can be carried out in thermal oven at 90 C to 100 C for 1-2 hours to ensure more complete polymerization.
The resulting polymer has a swell fraction of 0 in silicone oil, a refractive index of 1.477, and a modulus of elasticity of 0.163 Mpa.
EXAMPLE 2The following formulation is add together, mixed well, and processed the same the formulation in Example 1:
The resulting polymer has a swell fraction of 0.019, a refractive index of 1.473, and a modulus of elasticity of 0.27 Mpa.
While illustrative embodiments of the invention are described above, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art that various changes and modifications may be made therein without departing from the invention.
Claims
1. A polymeric material for an ophthalmic device, the polymeric material comprising:
- butyl acrylate, trifluoroethyl methacrylate, and phenylethyl acrylate.
2. The material of claim 1 wherein the butylacrylate is present in the amount from about 35% to about 65% by volume.
3. The material of claim 2 wherein the butylacrylate is present in the amount from about 45% to about 55% by volume.
4. The material of claim 1 wherein the trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the amount from about 15% to about 30% by volume.
5. The material of claim 4 wherein the trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the amount from about 18% to about 22% by volume.
6. The material of claim 1 wherein the phenylethyl acrylate is present in the amount from about 20% to about 40% by volume.
7. The material of claim 1 wherein the phenylethyl acrylate is present in the amount from about 26% to about 34% by volume.
8. The material of claim 1 wherein the butylacrylate is present in the amount from about 35% to about 65% by volume, the trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the amount from about 15% to about 30% by volume, and the phenylethyl acrylate is present in the amount from about 20% to about 40% by volume.
9. The material of claim 8 wherein the butylacrylate is present in the amount from about 45% to about 55% by volume, the trifluoroethyl methacrylate is present in the amount from about 18% to about 22% by volume, and the phenylethyl acrylate is present in the amount from about 26% to about 34% by volume.
10. The material of claim 1 further comprising a cross-linking agent.
11. The material of claim 10 wherein the cross-linking agent is ethylene glycol dimethylacrylate.
12. The material of claim 1 further comprising an ultraviolet light absorbing material.
13. The material of claim 1 wherein the ophthalmic lens is an intraocular lens, wherein the intraocular lens comprises an central optic portion and a peripheral non-optic portion, and wherein the central optic portion is comprised of the polymer material, and wherein the non-optic portion is comprised of a second polymer material different than the polymer material.
14. A method of manufacturing the polymeric material for the ophthalmic device of claim 1, comprising: providing a mixed composition by adding together and mixing butyl acrylate in the amount of about 35% to about 65% by volume, trifluoroethyl methacrylate in the amount of about 15% to about 30% by volume, and phenylethyl acrylate in the amount of about 20% to about 40% by volume; and curing the mixed composition.
| 4111995 | September 5, 1978 | Nelson |
| 4253199 | March 3, 1981 | Banko |
| 4254509 | March 10, 1981 | Tennant |
| 4304895 | December 8, 1981 | Loshaek |
| 4373218 | February 15, 1983 | Schachar |
| 4409691 | October 18, 1983 | Levy |
| 4423809 | January 3, 1984 | Mazzocco |
| 4435856 | March 13, 1984 | L'Esperance |
| 4466705 | August 21, 1984 | Michelson |
| 4490860 | January 1, 1985 | Rainin |
| 4494254 | January 22, 1985 | Lopez |
| 4512040 | April 23, 1985 | McClure |
| 4528311 | July 9, 1985 | Beard et al. |
| 4575373 | March 11, 1986 | Johnson |
| 4585457 | April 29, 1986 | Kalb |
| 4604295 | August 5, 1986 | Humphreys |
| 4615701 | October 7, 1986 | Woods |
| 4620954 | November 4, 1986 | Singer et al. |
| 4685921 | August 11, 1987 | Peyman |
| 4685922 | August 11, 1987 | Peyman |
| 4693717 | September 15, 1987 | Michelson |
| 4720286 | January 19, 1988 | Bailey et al. |
| 4731078 | March 15, 1988 | Stoy et al. |
| 4731079 | March 15, 1988 | Stoy |
| 4731080 | March 15, 1988 | Galin |
| 4784485 | November 15, 1988 | Ho |
| 4787903 | November 29, 1988 | Grendahl |
| 4790847 | December 13, 1988 | Woods |
| 4813956 | March 21, 1989 | Gupta |
| 4816031 | March 28, 1989 | Pfoff |
| 4834750 | May 30, 1989 | Gupta |
| 4836201 | June 6, 1989 | Patton et al. |
| 4842601 | June 27, 1989 | Smith |
| 4848343 | July 18, 1989 | Wallsten et al. |
| 4888012 | December 19, 1989 | Horn et al. |
| 4892543 | January 9, 1990 | Turely |
| 4902293 | February 20, 1990 | Feaster |
| 4919151 | April 24, 1990 | Grubbs et al. |
| 4932966 | June 12, 1990 | Christie et al. |
| 4946469 | August 7, 1990 | Sarfarazi |
| 4950289 | August 21, 1990 | Krasner |
| 4963148 | October 16, 1990 | Sulc et al. |
| 4994082 | February 19, 1991 | Richards et al. |
| 4995879 | February 26, 1991 | Dougherty |
| 4995880 | February 26, 1991 | Galib |
| 5015254 | May 14, 1991 | Greite |
| 5035710 | July 30, 1991 | Nakada et al. |
| 5047051 | September 10, 1991 | Cumming |
| 5061914 | October 29, 1991 | Busch et al. |
| 5066301 | November 19, 1991 | Wiley |
| 5145884 | September 8, 1992 | Yamamoto et al. |
| 5145935 | September 8, 1992 | Hayashi |
| 5152789 | October 6, 1992 | Willis |
| 5171266 | December 15, 1992 | Wiley et al. |
| 5201763 | April 13, 1993 | Brady et al. |
| 5213579 | May 25, 1993 | Yamada et al. |
| 5224957 | July 6, 1993 | Gasser et al. |
| 5235003 | August 10, 1993 | Ward et al. |
| 5251993 | October 12, 1993 | Sigourney |
| 5275623 | January 4, 1994 | Sarfarazi |
| 5275624 | January 4, 1994 | Hara et al. |
| 5288293 | February 22, 1994 | O'Donnell, Jr. |
| 5290892 | March 1, 1994 | Namdaran et al. |
| 5326347 | July 5, 1994 | Cumming |
| 5405386 | April 11, 1995 | Rheinish et al. |
| 5443506 | August 22, 1995 | Garabet |
| 5444106 | August 22, 1995 | Zhou et al. |
| 5476514 | December 19, 1995 | Cumming |
| 5489302 | February 6, 1996 | Skottun |
| 5496366 | March 5, 1996 | Cumming |
| 5506300 | April 9, 1996 | Ward et al. |
| 5512609 | April 30, 1996 | Yang |
| 5578081 | November 26, 1996 | McDonald |
| 5585049 | December 17, 1996 | Grisoni et al. |
| 5593436 | January 14, 1997 | Langerman |
| 5607472 | March 4, 1997 | Thompson |
| 5628795 | May 13, 1997 | Langerman |
| 5665822 | September 9, 1997 | Bitler et al. |
| 5674282 | October 7, 1997 | Cumming |
| 5697973 | December 16, 1997 | Peyman et al. |
| 5702441 | December 30, 1997 | Zhou |
| 5774273 | June 30, 1998 | Bornhorst |
| 5776191 | July 7, 1998 | Mazzocco |
| 5776192 | July 7, 1998 | McDonald |
| 5814680 | September 29, 1998 | Imafuku et al. |
| 5843188 | December 1, 1998 | McDonald |
| 5891931 | April 6, 1999 | Leboeuf et al. |
| 5922821 | July 13, 1999 | LeBoeuf et al. |
| 5928282 | July 27, 1999 | Nigam |
| 5964802 | October 12, 1999 | Anello et al. |
| 5984962 | November 16, 1999 | Anello et al. |
| 6013101 | January 11, 2000 | Israel |
| 6015842 | January 18, 2000 | Leboeuf et al. |
| 6102539 | August 15, 2000 | Tucker |
| 6117171 | September 12, 2000 | Skottun |
| 6124980 | September 26, 2000 | Cerbell |
| 6139576 | October 31, 2000 | Doyle et al. |
| 6140438 | October 31, 2000 | Ojio et al. |
| 6160084 | December 12, 2000 | Langer et al. |
| 6176878 | January 23, 2001 | Gwon et al. |
| 6180687 | January 30, 2001 | Hammer et al. |
| 6188526 | February 13, 2001 | Sasaya et al. |
| 6190410 | February 20, 2001 | Lamielle et al. |
| 6195807 | March 6, 2001 | Chou |
| 6197059 | March 6, 2001 | Cumming |
| 6217612 | April 17, 2001 | Woods |
| 6225367 | May 1, 2001 | Chaouk et al. |
| 6245106 | June 12, 2001 | Makker et al. |
| 6299641 | October 9, 2001 | Woods |
| 6302911 | October 16, 2001 | Hanna |
| 6322589 | November 27, 2001 | Cumming |
| 6342073 | January 29, 2002 | Cumming et al. |
| 6387126 | May 14, 2002 | Cumming |
| 6388043 | May 14, 2002 | Langer et al. |
| 6406494 | June 18, 2002 | Laguette et al. |
| 6413262 | July 2, 2002 | Saishin et al. |
| 6423094 | July 23, 2002 | Sarfarazi |
| 6443985 | September 3, 2002 | Woods |
| 6450642 | September 17, 2002 | Jethmalani et al. |
| 6464725 | October 15, 2002 | Skottun |
| 6488708 | December 3, 2002 | Sarfarazi |
| 6493151 | December 10, 2002 | Schachar |
| 6503276 | January 7, 2003 | Lang et al. |
| 6517577 | February 11, 2003 | Callahan et al. |
| 6551354 | April 22, 2003 | Ghazizadeh et al. |
| 6552860 | April 22, 2003 | Alden |
| 6554859 | April 29, 2003 | Lang et al. |
| 6555030 | April 29, 2003 | Weinschenk, III |
| 6585768 | July 1, 2003 | Hamano et al. |
| 6589550 | July 8, 2003 | Hodd et al. |
| 6592621 | July 15, 2003 | Domino |
| 6599317 | July 29, 2003 | Weinschenk, III et al. |
| 6601956 | August 5, 2003 | Jean et al. |
| 6610350 | August 26, 2003 | Suzuki et al. |
| 6616691 | September 9, 2003 | Tran |
| 6616692 | September 9, 2003 | Glick et al. |
| 6638304 | October 28, 2003 | Azar |
| 6638305 | October 28, 2003 | Laguette |
| 6638306 | October 28, 2003 | Cumming |
| 6645245 | November 11, 2003 | Preussner |
| 6645246 | November 11, 2003 | Weinschenk, III et al. |
| 6656223 | December 2, 2003 | Brady |
| 6660035 | December 9, 2003 | Lang et al. |
| 6692525 | February 17, 2004 | Brady et al. |
| 6695881 | February 24, 2004 | Peng et al. |
| 6709108 | March 23, 2004 | Levine et al. |
| 6712848 | March 30, 2004 | Wolf et al. |
| 6713583 | March 30, 2004 | Liao et al. |
| 6730123 | May 4, 2004 | Klopotek |
| 6743388 | June 1, 2004 | Sridharan et al. |
| 6749632 | June 15, 2004 | Sandstedt et al. |
| 6749634 | June 15, 2004 | Hanna |
| 6786934 | September 7, 2004 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 6818158 | November 16, 2004 | Pham et al. |
| 6827738 | December 7, 2004 | Willis et al. |
| 6836374 | December 28, 2004 | Esch et al. |
| 6852793 | February 8, 2005 | Salamone et al. |
| 6860601 | March 1, 2005 | Shadduck |
| 6878320 | April 12, 2005 | Alderson et al. |
| 6884261 | April 26, 2005 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 6899732 | May 31, 2005 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 6899850 | May 31, 2005 | Haywood et al. |
| 6926736 | August 9, 2005 | Peng et al. |
| 6935743 | August 30, 2005 | Shadduck |
| 6966649 | November 22, 2005 | Shadduck |
| 6969403 | November 29, 2005 | Peng et al. |
| 7060094 | June 13, 2006 | Shahinpoor et al. |
| 7068439 | June 27, 2006 | Esch et al. |
| 7104648 | September 12, 2006 | Dahi et al. |
| 7122053 | October 17, 2006 | Esch |
| 7144423 | December 5, 2006 | McDonald |
| 7217288 | May 15, 2007 | Esch et al. |
| 7241312 | July 10, 2007 | Lai et al. |
| 7247689 | July 24, 2007 | Makker et al. |
| 7264351 | September 4, 2007 | Shadduck |
| 7278739 | October 9, 2007 | Shadduck |
| 7322694 | January 29, 2008 | Dahi et al. |
| 7416300 | August 26, 2008 | Wei et al. |
| 7494505 | February 24, 2009 | Kappelhof et al. |
| 7753953 | July 13, 2010 | Yee |
| 20010001836 | May 24, 2001 | Cumming |
| 20010016771 | August 23, 2001 | Cumming |
| 20010039449 | November 8, 2001 | Johnson et al. |
| 20020046783 | April 25, 2002 | Johnson et al. |
| 20020055777 | May 9, 2002 | Cumming et al. |
| 20020072795 | June 13, 2002 | Green |
| 20020095212 | July 18, 2002 | Boehm |
| 20020107568 | August 8, 2002 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20020111678 | August 15, 2002 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20020116057 | August 22, 2002 | Ting et al. |
| 20020116058 | August 22, 2002 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20020116059 | August 22, 2002 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20020116060 | August 22, 2002 | Nguyen et al. |
| 20020116061 | August 22, 2002 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20020133228 | September 19, 2002 | Sarver |
| 20020161434 | October 31, 2002 | Laguette et al. |
| 20020161435 | October 31, 2002 | Portney |
| 20020177896 | November 28, 2002 | Israel |
| 20020193876 | December 19, 2002 | Lang et al. |
| 20030003295 | January 2, 2003 | Dreher et al. |
| 20030004569 | January 2, 2003 | Haefliger |
| 20030018384 | January 23, 2003 | Valyunin et al. |
| 20030042176 | March 6, 2003 | Alderson et al. |
| 20030050695 | March 13, 2003 | Lin et al. |
| 20030050696 | March 13, 2003 | Cumming |
| 20030060878 | March 27, 2003 | Shadduck |
| 20030060881 | March 27, 2003 | Glick et al. |
| 20030078656 | April 24, 2003 | Nguyen |
| 20030078657 | April 24, 2003 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20030078658 | April 24, 2003 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20030083744 | May 1, 2003 | Khoury |
| 20030109925 | June 12, 2003 | Ghazizadeh et al. |
| 20030109926 | June 12, 2003 | Portney |
| 20030130732 | July 10, 2003 | Sarfarazi |
| 20030135272 | July 17, 2003 | Brady et al. |
| 20030149480 | August 7, 2003 | Shadduck |
| 20030158599 | August 21, 2003 | Brady et al. |
| 20030171808 | September 11, 2003 | Phillips |
| 20030183960 | October 2, 2003 | Buazza et al. |
| 20030187505 | October 2, 2003 | Liao |
| 20030199977 | October 23, 2003 | Cumming |
| 20040001180 | January 1, 2004 | Epstein |
| 20040006386 | January 8, 2004 | Valint et al. |
| 20040006387 | January 8, 2004 | Kelman |
| 20040008419 | January 15, 2004 | Schachar |
| 20040015236 | January 22, 2004 | Sarfarazi |
| 20040039446 | February 26, 2004 | McNicholas |
| 20040054408 | March 18, 2004 | Glick et al. |
| 20040059343 | March 25, 2004 | Shearer et al. |
| 20040082993 | April 29, 2004 | Woods |
| 20040082994 | April 29, 2004 | Woods et al. |
| 20040085511 | May 6, 2004 | Uno et al. |
| 20040111151 | June 10, 2004 | Paul et al. |
| 20040111152 | June 10, 2004 | Kelman |
| 20040111153 | June 10, 2004 | Woods et al. |
| 20040127984 | July 1, 2004 | Paul et al. |
| 20040162612 | August 19, 2004 | Portney et al. |
| 20040181279 | September 16, 2004 | Nun |
| 20040190153 | September 30, 2004 | Esch |
| 20040230203 | November 18, 2004 | Yaguchi |
| 20050021139 | January 27, 2005 | Shadduck |
| 20050119740 | June 2, 2005 | Esch et al. |
| 20050131535 | June 16, 2005 | Woods |
| 20050149183 | July 7, 2005 | Shadduck |
| 20050165410 | July 28, 2005 | Zadno-Azizi et al. |
| 20050251253 | November 10, 2005 | Gross |
| 20050264756 | December 1, 2005 | Esch |
| 20060041307 | February 23, 2006 | Esch et al. |
| 20060069433 | March 30, 2006 | Ben Nun |
| 20060100703 | May 11, 2006 | Evans et al. |
| 20060184181 | August 17, 2006 | Cole et al. |
| 20060253196 | November 9, 2006 | Woods |
| 20070005136 | January 4, 2007 | Richardson |
| 20070010880 | January 11, 2007 | Esch |
| 20070021831 | January 25, 2007 | Clarke |
| 20070050023 | March 1, 2007 | Bessiere et al. |
| 20070078515 | April 5, 2007 | Brady |
| 20070088433 | April 19, 2007 | Esch et al. |
| 20070100445 | May 3, 2007 | Shadduck |
| 20070106377 | May 10, 2007 | Smith et al. |
| 20070129801 | June 7, 2007 | Cumming |
| 20070162112 | July 12, 2007 | Burriesci et al. |
| 20070203578 | August 30, 2007 | Scholl et al. |
| 20070213817 | September 13, 2007 | Esch et al. |
| 20070244561 | October 18, 2007 | Ben Nun |
| 20070299487 | December 27, 2007 | Shadduck |
| 20080004699 | January 3, 2008 | Ben Nun |
| 20080015689 | January 17, 2008 | Esch et al. |
| 20080027537 | January 31, 2008 | Gerlach et al. |
| 20080139769 | June 12, 2008 | Iwamoto et al. |
| 20080188930 | August 7, 2008 | Mentak et al. |
| 20080269887 | October 30, 2008 | Cumming |
| 20080269987 | October 30, 2008 | Barron et al. |
| 20080300680 | December 4, 2008 | Ben Nun |
| 20090228101 | September 10, 2009 | Zadno-Azizi |
| 20090234449 | September 17, 2009 | DeJuan, Jr. et al. |
| 20090264998 | October 22, 2009 | Mentak et al. |
| 20090312836 | December 17, 2009 | Pinchuk et al. |
| 20100063588 | March 11, 2010 | Park |
| 20100228344 | September 9, 2010 | Shadduck |
| 20100228346 | September 9, 2010 | Esch |
| 0898972 | March 1999 | EP |
| 2784575 | April 2000 | FR |
| 07-044938 | May 1995 | JP |
| 9294754 | November 1997 | JP |
| 10-206609 | August 1998 | JP |
| 11276509 | October 1999 | JP |
| WO 97/06751 | February 1997 | WO |
| WO 00/41650 | July 2000 | WO |
| WO 00/64655 | November 2000 | WO |
| WO 01/60286 | August 2001 | WO |
| WO 01/97742 | December 2001 | WO |
| WO 2004/010895 | February 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004/046768 | June 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004/072689 | August 2004 | WO |
| WO 2005/084588 | September 2005 | WO |
| WO 2006/004707 | January 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006/047383 | May 2006 | WO |
| WO 2006/088440 | August 2006 | WO |
| WO 2007/005529 | January 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007/030095 | March 2007 | WO |
| WO 2007/061688 | May 2007 | WO |
| WO 2009/100322 | August 2009 | WO |
- Your, Jingjong; U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,720 entitled “Lens material and methods of curing with UV light,” filed Jul. 22, 2008.
- Smiley et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,857 entitled “Accommodating intraocular lenses and methods of use,” filed Jul. 22, 2008.
- Smiley et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/178,304 entitled “Post-implant accommodating lens modification,” filed Jul. 23, 2008.
- Smiley et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/17,.565 entitled “Lens delivery system,” filed Jul. 23, 2008.
- Choi et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/178,454 entitled “Systems and methods for testing intraocular lenses,” filed Jul. 23, 2008.
- Baughman et al., “Negative poisson's ratios for extreme states fo matter,” Science, vol. 288, pp. 1028-2022, Jun. 16, 2000.
- Baughman, “Avoiding the shrink,” Nature, vol. 425, pp. 667, Oct. 16, 2003.
- Gordon, “Applications of shape memory polyurethanes,” Proceedings of the First Intl Conf. on Shape Memory and Superelastic Tech., Asilomar Conference Center, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, pp. 115-119, 1994.
- Jeon et al., “Shape memory and nonstructure in poly(norbornyl-POSS) copolymers,” Polymer International, vol. 49, pp. 453-457, 2000.
- Kim et al., “Polyurethanes having shape memory effects,” Polymer, vol. 37, No. 26, pp. 5781-5793, 1996.
- Lakes et al., “Dramatically stiffer elastic composite materials due to negative stiffness phase?,” Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, vol. 50, pp. 979-1009, 2002.
- Lakes et al., “Extreme damping in composite materials with negative-stiffness inclusions,” Nature, vol. 410, pp. 565-567, Mar. 29, 2001.
- Lakes, “A broader view of membranes,” Nature, vol. 414, pp. 503-504, Nov. 29, 2001.
- Lakes, “Extreme damping in compliant composites with a negative-stiffness phase,” Philosophical Magazine Letters, vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 95-100, 2001.
- Lakes, “Extreme damping in composite materials with a negative stiffness phase,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 86, No. 13, pp. 2897-2899, Mar. 26, 2001.
- Lakes, “Lateral deformations in extreme matter,” Science, vol. 288, pp. 1976, Jun. 2000.
- Lakes, “Negative poisson's ratio materials,” Science, vol. 238, pp. 551, Oct. 23, 1987.
- Lakes, “No contractile obligations,” Nature, vol. 358, pp. 713-714, 1992.
- Li et al., “Crystallinity and morphology of segmented polyurethanes with different soft-segment length,” Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 62, pp. 631-638, 1996.
- Liu et al., “Thermomechanical characterization of a tailored series of shape memory polymers,” Journal of Applied Medical Polymers, vol. 6, No. 2, 2002.
- Mather et al., “Strain recovery in POSS hybrid thermoplastics,” Polymer Preprints, vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 528-529, 2000.
- Metcalfe et al., “Cold hibernated elastic memory foams for endovascular interventions,” Biomaterials, vol. 24, pp. 491-497, 2003.
- Lakes et al., “Microbuckling instability in elastomeric cellular sollids,” J. Materials Science, vol. 28, pp. 4667-4672, 1993.
- Takahashi et al., “Structure and properties of shape-memory polyurethane block copolymers,” Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 60, pp. 1061-1069, 1996.
- Tobushi et al., “Thermomechanical properties of shape memory polymers of polyurethane series and their applications,” Journal de Physique IV, Colloque C1, vol. 6, pp. 377-384, 1996.
- Wang et al., “Deformation of extreme viscoelastic metals and composites,” Materials Science and Enginerring A, vol. 370, pp. 41-49, 2004.
- Wang et al., “Extreme stiffness systems due to negative stiffness elements,” American Journal of Physics, vol. 72, No. 1, pp. 40-50, Jan. 2004.
- Wang et al., “Stable extremely-high-damping discrete viscoelastic systems due to native stiffness elements,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 84, No. 22, pp. 4451-4453, May 31, 2004.
- Xu et al., “Basic negative poisson's ratio microstructures by soft lithography,” Advanced Materials, vol. 11, No. 14, 1999, pp. 1186-1189, 1999.
- Smiley et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/178,565 entitled “Lens delivery system,” filed Jul. 23, 2008.
- Shadduck, John H.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/347,816 entitled “Intraocular lenses and business methods,” filed Dec. 31, 2008.
- Gruber et al.; Exhaustive soxhlet extraction for the complete removal of residual compounds . . . ; Journal of Biomedical Materials Research; vol. 53; No. 5; pp. 445-448; Mar. 2000.
- Esch et al; U.S. Appl. No. 11/844,108 entitled “Accommodating Intraocular Lens System and Method” filed Aug. 23, 2007.
- Smith et al; U.S. Appl. No. 11/844,087 entitled “Accommodating Intraocular Lens System Having Spherical Aberration Compensation and Method,” filed Aug. 23, 2007.
- Wyant et al; “Basic Wavefront Aberration Theory for Optical Metrology,” Applied Optics and Optical Engineering, vol. XI, 1992:1-13.
- Shadduck, John H.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/694,184 entitled “Intraocular Lenses and Business Methods,” filed Jan. 26, 2010.
- Argento et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/685,531 entitled “Intraocular Lenses and Methods of Accounting for Capsule Size Variability and Post-Implant Changes in the Eye,” filed Jan. 11, 2010.
- Lendlein et al., “Biodegradable, elastic shape-memory polymers for potential biomedical applications”, Science; vol. 296; pp. 1673-1676; May 31, 2002.
- Lendlein et al., “Shape-memory polymers,” Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.; vol. 41; pp. 2034-2057; 2002.
- Shadduck, John H.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/852,733 entitled “Intraocular Lens System and Method for Power Adjustment,” filed Aug. 9, 2010.
- Esch et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/853,892 entitled “Accommodating Intraocular Lens Having Peripherally Actuated Deflectable Surface and Method,” filed Aug. 10, 2010.
- Hildebrand et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 12/872,314 entitled “Lens Capsule Size Estimation,” filed Aug. 31, 2010.
- Conlisk, A. T. et al; Mass Transfer and Flow in Electrically Charged Micro- and Nano-channels; Analytical Chemistry, vol. 74; iss. 9; pp. 2139-2150; 2002.
- Dubbelman et al.; The Thickness of the Aging Human Lens Obtained from Corrected Scheimpflug Images; Optometry & Vison Science; vo. 78; iss. 6; pp. 411-416; Jun. 2001.
- Gorder, P. F.; Electricity can pump medicine in implanted medical devices; Ohio State Research News; 3 pgs.; May 2, 2002 (printed from internet Aug. 19, 2010).
- Tehrani et al.; Capsule measuring ring to predict capsular bag diameter and follow its course after foldable intraocular lens implantation; J Cataract Refract Surg.; vol. 29; No. 11; pp. 2127-2134; Nov. 2003.
- Vass et al.; Prediction of pseudophakic capsular bag diameter based on biometric variables; J Cataract Refract Surg.; vol. 25; pp. 1376-1381; 1999.
Type: Grant
Filed: Feb 21, 2008
Date of Patent: Apr 17, 2012
Patent Publication Number: 20080200982
Assignee: PowerVision, Inc. (Belmont, CA)
Inventor: Jingjong Your (Cupertino, CA)
Primary Examiner: Michael M Bernshteyn
Attorney: Shay Glenn LLP
Application Number: 12/034,942
International Classification: C08L 31/00 (20060101); G02B 1/04 (20060101); A61F 2/14 (20060101); A61F 2/16 (20060101); C08F 118/02 (20060101);
